Aiganysh Ibraimova ICP-110

First Year Seminar 2 First draft of research paper 17.03.2011 Topic: Plato and Confucius- where East meets West Let me be clear. I am not comparing two great philosophers, I never can. To compare two most significant philosophers in history of humankind would be very incorrect. All I can is to find similar areas in an enormous field of thoughts of two remarkable philosophers. What can be similar in these philosophers, who were born during different ages on different parts of the world? Many people would answer that philosopher from ancient East and west had probably different views and world sight. Yes, I agree: place, culture, mentality of people is very important in forming a background for any person, even philosopher, but common understanding of good and bad is always the same. What is more, the vital thing is intention. The intention of Plato and Confucius was to bring peace to country, make society glad and improve morals and nature of people; so I think that if intention of two great philosophers was the same, they cannot be dissimilar. The first similarity is practical implementation. If we look at philosophy books, the main approach of their philosophy was practice. Two wise men believed knowledge and practice should be implemented to life in practical way, otherwise wisdom would be useless.

Let me take most famous work of Plato, the Republic. (The book is a guide for a society to develop; it states much about perception of justice, consists of Platos theories about

knowledge, the Forms and society, but the essential point is in the republic itself, Plato provides the step-by-step plan to build an excellent society with outstanding government.) From the first pages of the Republic, I felt a great practical wisdom, starting from the sensible definitions of justice till the structure of Kallipolis. Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (stanford.plato.edu) states that Plato as his educator, Socrates focused all their studies on practical implementation. Socrates deemed that wisdom is created for practice. Even the content in the Republic shows us the great practical approach of the book. Part 1. Introduction The conventional view of justice. The characters in the book interpret the definition of justice. Part 2. Preliminaries Socrates, the narrator describes the meaning of social organization and civilized society. Part 3. The first stage of education Socrates provides a schedule for all students with concrete subjects and requirements. Part 4. Guardians and auxiliaries

The life of guardians(warriors) is portrayed. Part 5. Justice in state and individual The understanding of justice in the state, mental conflict and justice in the individual is depicted. Part 6.Women and the family Socrates describes status of women in the just state. Part 7. The philosopher Ruler Socrates and his mates discuss the features of the philosopher ruler, the ruler of Kallipolis.

Part 8. Education of the Philosopher Ruler The actual curriculum for Philosopher Ruler is described by Socrates. Part 9. Imperfect societies The characters of the book converse about flawed societies and regimes there. Part 10. Theory of art Socrates narrates about art, drama and poetry and what kind of policy should be implemented towards them. Part 11. The immortality of the soul and the rewards of goodness The characters talk about soul immortality and theory of the Forms. As you can assume the whole Republic is about practical advance. Plato provided prcised politics in the city; he even provided method of educating the future rulers. Definitely, we can call Plato as a practical philosopher.

In addition, Lun Yui also has an evidence of practical notes of Kong Quis (Confucius) teachings. The Master asked, I can speak to Hui all day without his disagreeing with me in any way. Thus he would seem stupid. However, when I take a closer look at what he does in private after he has withdrawn from my presence, I discover that it does, in fact, throw light on what I said. Hui is not stupid after all.

In my opinion, in this analect Confucius voluntarily shows the importance of practice. Confucius admires Hui, his student for being quiet and remembering wisdom from classes and implementing knowledge, he gained, to life. He even admires Hui, so, doubtless, we can say that Confucius encourages and promotes practice in direct way.

The most common similarity of Plato and Confucius is practicing wisdom, I think.

Second great similarity of Wiseman is expression as benevolence for Confucius or goodness for Plato. The ancient Chinese concept Wren means benevolence, goodness or righteousness. This concept is widely used by Confucius in his analects. He declares benevolence as a virtue and required part of characteristics of any gentleman. In my opinion, benevolence for Confucius is goodness and desire to do well, so purity of feelings, emotions and intentions is one of the key concepts of benevolence. A true benevolent person has positive feelings towards all

living organisms, controlled and encouraging emotions towards all men, and finally pure intentions in all actions. The benevolent man is attracted to benevolence because he feels at home in it. The wise man is attracted to benevolence because he finds it his advantages. (Book 4, analect 2)

I think in analect above, Confucius states that being benevolent makes a true benevolent person to feel at home in it and brings him happiness and joy. I really admire that type of benevolence, where person enjoys of striving for good. From this analect we can assume that however, wise people can use benevolence for their profit, but they cant become a true benevolent people. There are many other qualities, which partially describe benevolence, they are: modesty, loyalty, respectfulness and of course, hard work; it is not easy to keep benevolence, during our difficult lives, we, the people have many lusts, obstacles before fulfilling and completing our aims. Benevolence is not an exception-the person has to work a lot to achieve high level of benevolence. Plato also uses such term as goodness much in his works. In Republic, for instance, there is a special section only on goodness. Goodness for Plato is the same as benevolence for Confucius, but the manes are just different. Goodness for Plato is immaterial, which convinces people to do good deeds without greed intentions, the highest form of decency. Plato created very famous theory of Forms, which states that only a person, who passed all stages of learning like images, opinion, mathematical objects can reach the

Forms, or the ideas and identify the real world. This theory lets a human being to achieve goodness. In the Republic, Plato uses expression as virtuous man, which is equivalent to benevolent person. As I mentioned above, the virtuous man by Plato has the same qualities as benevolent, such as purity of thoughts and intentions, loyalty, respectfulness, truthfulness and intelligence. But do opinions of two philosophers meet in question Can everybody, who makes an attempt, become benevolent/ virtuous? Confucius doesnt limit benevolence; he declares that benevolence is opened for everybody. In many analects Confucius shows that benevolent person can be anybody, but the person should have pure thinking and right intentions, without purity of soul, an individual can never become a true benevolent person, because purity is also key point in goodness. In addition, benevolence requires a lot of effort, because it is not easy to become good. Plato here would answer considerably analogous to Confucius. As I mentioned above, Plato generated theory of Forms, where the forms, or the ideas are the good, only true compassionate person can achieve the good. For Plato, making an attempt is not enough (as for Confucius); he believed that to identify the good and be called as true virtuous person, a human being should work hard on character and make huge effort to recognize himself and the world around. And to do that, a person should have a true strive to the good.

So, in question if everybody could become virtuous or not, Plato and Confucius have very related answers. Philosopher from East can never be the same as philosopher from West, but in many of their ideas they meet and support each others points. I think that if people have the same understanding of the good and bad, people cannot be opposite; Plato and Confucius had the same aim- to make society educated, content and virtuous. I think that if they would meet, they would understand each other very well and admire each others wisdom.